Cruciform
New member
Already answered (Post #183).You still teach salvation by works, by what a person does!
Already answered (Post #183).You still teach salvation by works, by what a person does!
Your false teaching continues!Already answered (Post #183).
So, once again, no proof whatsoever. What a surprise. :yawn:Did you have fun?
The statements in Post #183 stand exactly as posted.Your false teaching continues!
Right back at you, friend.You can post all you want, nothing is going to change.
You're welcomeSo, once again, no proof whatsoever. What a surprise. :yawn:
You're ignorant.You're welcome.
Because the Catholic Church is that one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ himself, and against which he declared that the gates of Hades would never prevail (Mt. 16:18-19). This one historic Church is therefore the only Church established by Christ to guide and teach the faithful in his own name and by his very authority (Mt. 28:18-20; 1 Tim. 3:15).
As far as there having been false teachers in the early Church:
"...apostolic succession affirms that Christian truths were accurately transmitted within the Church, so that the teachings of any Church authority at any time could be traced back in an unbroken chain to the apostles, and through them to Jesus himself. You knew you could trust the teachings of your bishop because he would have gotten his teachings from his predecessor, and so on, going all the way back to Christ.
"To be sure, as we have already noted, some bishops did deviate from what they had received and to that extent they are considered heretics. But that's the point. When they were faithful to the Tradition, their teachings were trustworthy. So this is not to claim that there was never dissent or disagreement in the early Church---indeed there was, and it was precisely this disagreement that led to the discussion of theological concepts, ans eventually to authoritative decisions about how to understand the person and work of Jesus Christ, and how to interpret Scripture. Eventually the debates led to councils of bishops, the successors of the apostles gathering to clarify the correct interpretations of Jesus' intentions for the church and of the apostolic writings. These conclusions of the early Church Fathers and the councils of bishops were confirmed as the dogmas of Christianity---the theological positions that were consistent with the conclusions of the previous generations, going all the way back to the apostles" (James Papandrea, HANDED DOWN: The Catholic Faith of the Early Christians [Catholic Answers Press, 2015], pp. 14-15).
I highly recommend this informed and well-written text:
J. Papandrea, HANDED DOWN: The Catholic Faith of the Early Christians (Catholic Answers Press, 2015)
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
Only according to the opinions of your chosen man-made non-Catholic sect, which is itself certainly not Christ's one historic Church. However, as I've already shown, the Catholic Church is indeed that one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ himself. Therefore, if your preferred sect disagrees with any of her doctrines, your sect must simply and necessarily be wrong.The Catholic denomination does things God says not to do. That is not the true church.
Catholics are mean for sure !You're ignorant.
(Incidentally, the Catholic Church, by definition, is not---indeed cannot be---a "denomination.")
Back to Post #204.Who planted the church at Antioch? Acts says that after Stephen's death, believers were scattered "except the apostles" (Acts 8:1) Some of those scattered went as far as Antioch, preached to people there, and converted many (Acts 11). We know none of these were apostles, and we know none of them were sent by apostles to found a church. Yet a church was founded. Barnabas was sent by the Apostles to check on them after this, strongly indicating the church there was already established. The Church at Antioch is immensely important, being the origin of the word "Christian", and base of operations for Paul. Yet it would seem it was founded outside apostolic succession, which tells me AS is not necessary.
I don't see 204Back to Post #204.
Catholics are mean for sure !
Who planted the church at Antioch? Acts says that after Stephen's death, believers were scattered "except the apostles" (Acts 8:1) Some of those scattered went as far as Antioch, preached to people there, and converted many (Acts 11). We know none of these were apostles, and we know none of them were sent by apostles to found a church. Yet a church was founded.
Barnabas was sent by the Apostles to check on them after this, strongly indicating the church there was already established. The Church at Antioch is immensely important, being the origin of the word "Christian", and base of operations for Paul. Yet it would seem it was founded outside apostolic succession, which tells me AS is not necessary.
Only according to the opinions of your chosen man-made non-Catholic sect, which is itself certainly not Christ's one historic Church. However, as I've already shown, the Catholic Church is indeed that one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ himself. Therefore, if your preferred sect disagrees with any of her doctrines, your sect must simply and necessarily be wrong.
(Incidentally, the Catholic Church, by definition, is not---indeed cannot be---a "denomination.")
His body is the universal churchPeter never considered himself to be anyone special aside from his personal knowledge of Jesus. Paul and John certainly never esteemed themselves lower than Peter in their knowledge of Jesus nor their establishing of the facts of all things Jesus Christ, including establishing His Supreme Church; His "Body".
His body is the universal church
:yawn:...according to the opinions of your chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect, anyway.The Catholic [Church] does things that God says not to do, as written in the Holy Bible.
As for calling the Catholic denomination 'denomination', it is a denomination...
The true church are true worshipers, as taught by the apostles themselves, in the New Testament.